The recent ceasefire between Iran and Israel, occurring despite ongoing US strikes, has challenged the notion of rigid global power blocs reminiscent of the Cold War era. Throughout the 12-day conflict, China and Russia, despite their strategic ties to Iran, maintained a distance and refrained from providing military support or direct action. Instead, they issued only statements, underscoring the limitations of the idea of an authoritarian 'axis' comprising Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. Analysts, including Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, have noted that these countries do not share the same institutional links or values as the US and its allies, which further weakens the concept of a binding alliance against the West. The ceasefire and the restrained responses from China and Russia puncture the narrative of a cohesive rival bloc, suggesting that the geopolitical landscape remains more fluid and less polarized than some US officials had suggested.
People who bitch about India being on “both sides” of geopolitical tug of wars: 🔹Do NOT understand the concept of multipolar world. It means a world without hegemons and blocs. It means that no country needs to choose a side. 🔹Which country chooses to be 100% against the
Russia, China and North Korea failed to help Iran when it was getting bombed by the US. And yet their four-way coalition lives on and will become more ominous, @andreaskluth says https://t.co/JErDYbGDPP
Russia, China and North Korea failed to help Iran when it was getting bombed by the US. And yet their four-way coalition lives on and will become more ominous, @andreaskluth says (via @opinion) https://t.co/VZzPwOR1NA